From: Peter Hutnick <peter-lists@hu...> - 2001-06-18 20:34:21
This is mostly for Tyler and Luke.
Have you guys looked at the phpGroupWare API? If it doesn't totally suck
(which I doubt it does) it seems like SM2 should use it.
That way those guys don't have to back-port the changes of every silly dot release.
Plus, it might help get all the "plugibilty" stuff off the ground . . . it is
always hardest to start with a blank sheet of paper.
Anyway, the below is what was on the pgpGroupWare list, and I am not sure how
many of you guys follow it.
BTW, is SM2 on track for the big end of summer (beta) unveiling?
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [phpGroupWare-developers] some idea of designing a new template
From: Dan Kuykendall <dan@...>
Peter Hutnick wrote:
> SM2, which is going to be a complete re-write, is going to be templatized
> and modularized to the extreme.
Im fairly aware of the plans, from talking with Luke fairly extensively
> It is slated for a functioning devel version at the end of the Summer.
> (I'm pretty confident that this is actually going to happen.)
I sure hope that the SM team really gets started on this
> This also means that SM 1.x is going to be a dead end within about six
Yes, and this is part of my frustration. My big problem is that they cant
seem to let me know if they will use a stripped down version of the phpgw
API. If they could commit to this, I would in turn to commit to delivering a
nice little stand alone version of our API with just the base functions that
are required so that SM could run stand alone or within the phpgw environment
with the same exact code base. This would keep us all from duplicating work,
pooling resources and delivering the best email app that our two combined
projects could generate.
But so far they have not let me know whats up with this, along with the fact
that SM2 has been on a purpetual 6-months from being started. At least I am
hearing from you that it looks like code for SM2 is being started this
summer... but it makes me fear even more that they will not be using a
mini-phpgw API. So this makes me think we will be maintaining a seperate
> This is mostly for Tyler and Luke.
> BTW, is SM2 on track for the big end of summer (beta) unveiling?
I silently handed over my code, ideas, thoughts, etc. regarding SM2 to
Luke. He's the sole developer of SM2 right now.
IMHO, I think that PHPGW is silly when it doesn't take advantage of PHP4
functions. I'm sure that they have very valid reasons, but it will start
to seem archaic later. Maybe we could write the SM2 engine and templates
and whatnot to be able to include a modified version of PHPGW instead of
vice-versa. <evil grin>